Friendly reminder to the media from Scott Walker: Two different judges have rejected the left’s new “scandal” about me

posted at 11:21 am on June 20, 2014 by Allahpundit

You already know that, I hope, although most of the media either doesn’t or is pretending that it doesn’t. Ed wrote two separate posts last month after a clearly irritated federal judge issued an injunction shutting down prosecutors’ secret investigation of Walker and conservative groups for allegedly coordinating during his recall election campaign. That injunction came after conservatives sued the prosecutors claiming that the secret probe was violating their First Amendment rights. The court agreed, emphatically. A few months before that, a Wisconsin state judge quashed several subpoenas issued by investigators because they failed to show probable cause that any campaign-finance crimes had been committed. The documents unsealed yesterday that sent the left into raptures are simply allegations by the prosecutors made as part of the now-defunct (pending appeal, of course) case. And yet you’d never know it from media reports like this hack job at WaPo wondering how damaging his new “scandal” will be to Walker’s 2016 chances. The court rulings aren’t even mentioned. Imagine if someone was sued, won his case, and the media reports the next day focused only on the plaintiff’s accusations without mentioning the verdict. That’s how desperate the left and their friends in the press are to punish Walker for his dual affront of signing the collective barganing law and beating back a liberal challenge in the 2012 recall election. He’s got a knack for thwarting them and they know it; now they need to try to blow him up on the launchpad before he’s reelected again and looks to 2016.

If you’re looking for an all-purpose summary on this to send around on social media, this short piece by Gabe Malor detailing the legal posture of the case and why yesterday’s hyperventilating was so sleazy and dishonest is the way to go. It’s like a Voxsplainer, except smart and informative:

Upon the unsealing of some of the probe documents by the federal appeals court, the media worked itself into a frenzy claiming that Walker was part of a criminal conspiracy. The media claim was based entirely on the subpoena document that was denied by the state judge as failing utterly to demonstrate probable cause to believe a crime occurred. In short: the judge, looking at all the evidence, found no reason to believe that a crime had occurred. That has not stopped the media from falsely implying otherwise.

This is largely accomplished by playing with verb tense. For example, the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel kicked off this infuriating libel with a piece that claimed, “John Doe prosecutors allege Scott Walker at center of ‘criminal scheme.’” The more accurate word, of course, would have been “alleged,” past-tense with the addition of the words “in denied subpoena request” or perhaps “in failed partisan investigation” or even “in politically-motivated secret investigation rejected by the state and federal courts.”

The New York Times, trumpeting the story on today’s front page, also uses the present tense to give the wrong impression.

They’re deliberately misleading people by minimizing or outright omitting the fact that two different courts have looked at these charges and sneered at them. And they’re doing this in service to a dubious secret investigation of political opponents that aimed for maximum humiliation, involving searches “conducted by six armed sheriff’s deputies with flak vests, bright lights … aimed at the [defendant's] houses, and multiple vehicles parked on the lots, police lights ablaze.” When it comes to Hillary destroying a 12-year-old rape victim to protect her client, notes David Harsanyi, they’re all about due process. When it comes to harassing their partisan enemies with tactics that have twice been smashed in court, you’re guilty until proven innocent. Good work, progressives.

Exit question: Any theories on why trust in the media has reached historic lows?

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

The Republican Party establishment somehow reasons if it wants to survive it must flood the country with tens of millions of illiterate voters who don’t speak English, hail from completely corrupt political cultures, and will vote 95% Democrat for generations to come.

Good. Give Walker some national attention over something that is bogus and will go away. He gets the attention and this should be handled the way the Dems handle the past: Dude, that was like years ago. And by 2016 it will be old news.

The lede here is that a judge issued an injunction to stop the witch hunt. It;s not just the the prosecution didn’t quite make their case. It’s such a flagrant abuse of power that a judge took the step of enjoining them to cut it the hell out. That’s humiliating tot he hack prosecutors. And they should probably be the ones subject to investigation.

Gabe Malor’s piece is well done. Nothing about the Left in the Media surprises me anymore. Walker will run in 2016. He is a fighter it seems and his message is awesome.

“Take government away from the people who have a vested interest in seeing it grow and give it back to the people who actually PAY for the whole damn thing in the first place” How does that NOT win in a country that is 17 trillion in Debt?

This is Lois Lerner’s playbook. Don’t forget that these prosecutors are obviously Democrat operatives and now how all kinds of private information from their opposition. Even if they lose in court, they have won.

Great post, AP. This proves how scared the libs and drive-bys are of Walker. This will only backfire, especially if he wins re-election by a comfortable enough margin to springboard him into a viable 2016 candidate.

There are no words sufficient to express the anger I have toward the liberal media. They will purposefully destroy people to advance their agenda. Very sad. I would gladly lead a “water” gang passing buckets of gasoline should the Milwaukee Journal/Sentinel building catch fire. Why we extend constitutional protection to these PR firms is beyond my ability to comprehend.

- Eric O’Keefe and the Wisconsin Club for Growth haven’t won yet. It is merely a preliminary injunction that has stopped the witchhunt With that said, it is extremely likely O’Keefe/Club for Growth will win on the federal side at every level the persecutors want to try to appeal to.

- A state-level lawsuit, and the John Doe judge’s quashing of the subpoenas, are currently winding their way through the state courts very slowly, with Supreme Court Chief Justice Shirley Abrahamson (a bona-fide Lawgiver-In-Black very sympathetic to the Rats) doing her best to slow-boat it as conservatives have a 4-3 majority there. An appellate court panel including Joanne Kloppenburg (yes, THAT Kloppenburg) and Brian Blanchard (who was behind the almost-successful takeover of Wisconsin politics by the Madison branch of the DemocRAT Party of Wisconsin through selective persecutions 12 years ago) reversed the quashing.

It’s hard to avoid the conclusion that Walker’s resume and personality represent a very high threat to the Dims in 2016. It goes beyond revenge for his surviving the recall and his action against the WI unions.

They seem to see Walker as a threat comparable to the second coming of Reagan.

I don’t see the same concentration on GOP 2016 hopefuls but they keep coming back to Walker, at great expense and after repeated failures.

It’s a bit odd since Walker isn’t all that conservative overall, not in the sense that a Cruz or Paul or Perry is. And maybe that is why, along with his sunny personality, they consider him such a threat.

The Birkenstock set here in The People’s Republicof Madidiotland are tying themselves in knots in spin exercises. Nobody wants to mention the two years this Stasi suppression has been going on. But, on the other side of the Wall of Denial this is getting about as much traction as, well, somebody in Birkenstocks.

- When conservatives catch up to what the lieberals have been doing, the lieberals declare the activity “illegal”.

- The lieberals then use whatever prosecutorial or executive power they have to target conservatives and only conservatives.

- When they fail at the ballot box, they go to the court of law. When they fail at the court of law, they go to the court of public opinion. When they fail at all three, they will simply seize whatever power they don’t already have.

Yesterday I went on the Yahoo web page and the lead photo/article was about a ‘damaging new scandal allegation’ against Scott Walker. It linked to an AP article that had been released FIVE MINUTES earlier. You don’t think this stuff is coordinated? And of course the AP article didn’t mention that these were old, discredited allegations that two judges had already repudiated.

Unbelievable how the anti-conservative machine works. And web sights like Yahoo (which I believe is the most visited sight in America) are becoming every bit as dangerous as the NY Times, etc.

So what options are left? Romney again, McBlame maybe? Howz about Christie? You’re not going to get a walking on water messiah running for GOP presnit. You people are just too damned picky. Any bad Republican President is better than what the hell we got now. Don’t throw a hissy and not vote come November. Vote GOP even if the candidate is the local dog catcher. It’s better than having to endure the coronation of queenie Hillbillary next January.

Let’s not forget that Obama has low friends in high places. Or at least places that can make people miserable.

Cindy Munford on June 20, 2014 at 11:56 AM

…again verifying what SE says right after your post…

- The lieberals then use whatever prosecutorial or executive power they have to target conservatives and only conservatives.

- When they fail at the ballot box, they go to the court of law. When they fail at the court of law, they go to the court of public opinion. When they fail at all three, they will simply seize whatever power they don’t already have.

Asked about what to do with the people here illegally, however, he stressed that he had never tried to undo the goal of allowing them to stay.

“The amendment that I introduced removed the path to citizenship, but it did not change the underlying work permit from the Gang of Eight,” he said during a recent visit to El Paso. Mr. Cruz also noted that he had not called for deportation or, as Mitt Romney famously advocated, self-deportation.

Gov. Walker being squishy on amnesty, really isn’t going to mean any thing at all by the time 2016 rolls around.

The GOPe and Talibama will do amnesty LONG before then. So, Walker’s thoughts on amnesty will likely be irrelevant anyway.

Meople on June 20, 2014 at 12:40 PM

First of all, I think that’s defeatist or could possibly cause a self-fulfilling prophesy. But my main point is that I think if somehow they do pass traitorous amnesty the R voters will remember, and lots of them may not even want to vote in November but will want to make sure that they don’t vote for those that passed or favored the legislation.

In addition, amnesty may come in more than one part, and if the GOPe passes part I, we still need to stand up against those that are going to be pushing for part II.

“In an exclusive interview with Breitbart News Executive Chairman Stephen K. Bannon for the Sirius XM Patriots network, Wisconsin GOP Gov. Scott Walker said he does not support amnesty and the Washington Post’s Aaron Blake, who previously reported Walker supports a “pathway to citizenship” for illegal immigrants took him “out of context.”

First of all, I think that’s defeatist or could possibly cause a self-fulfilling prophesy. But my main point is that I think if somehow they do pass traitorous amnesty the R voters will remember, and lots of them may not even want to vote in November but will want to make sure that they don’t vote for those that passed or favored the legislation.

In addition, amnesty may come in more than one part, and if the GOPe passes part I, we still need to stand up against those that are going to be pushing for part II.

anotherJoe on June 20, 2014 at 12:55 PM

First, I think Gov. Walker’s stance on amnesty may not be what you think it is. I’ve seen quotes from Walker indicating he ISN’T for amnesty. So I think at the very least we need to hear him outline his stance before we disqualify him.

And second, I consider myself a single issue voter for November. If the GOPe does amnesty (in any form) before November, they’re going to put their possible gains in serious jeopardy.

First, I think Gov. Walker’s stance on amnesty may not be what you think it is. I’ve seen quotes from Walker indicating he ISN’T for amnesty. So I think at the very least we need to hear him out..

Meople on June 20, 2014 at 1:14 PM

Yeah, I heard that too. But even Rubio says he’s not for “amnesty.” Maybe Walker is for earn-esty. The thing is I think Walker’s claim that he wasn’t for amnesty was shot down, at least around here. On the other hand, if someone can present any credible basis for Walker not being for amnesty, let’s hear it. Now?

The position of the next president on immigration will not make the slightest bit of difference if the federal bureaucracy has decided that it doesn’t want to enforce the law. I have no problem with vetting candidates with regard to their position on the issue. But I’m increasingly convinced that unless the next president is willing to take on the federal bureaucracies, and the unions that have them in an iron grip, then nothing else will matter. More than any other potential candidate, Walker has shown the willingness and ability to take them on and break their power. Until someone else comes along with similar credentials, he’s the guy.

That’s how desperate the left and their friends in the press are to punish Walker for his dual affront of signing the collective barganing law and beating back a liberal challenge in the 2012 recall election.

It’s not that they just want to punish Walker for what he did.

They fear him. They have identified who they think would be the most formidable and likely successful R candidate, and they are trying to knock him out early because a Republican with the intestinal fortitude to really go after the corruption that is the left is their worst nightmare.

As the Wall Street Journal has documented, all of these lowlife “prosecutors” are d-cRATs affiliated with and coordinating with the d-cRAT party in WI. Scott Walker- one of the MOST SUCCESSFUL GOVERNORS IN WI HISTORY- can’t be defeated legitimately by the socialist extremists, so they’ll use every disreputable, slimebag, dirty trick they can on him. Move over OBOZO Dept of INJustice – WI will make an even WORSE farce of justice!

Uh, even your link corroborates the NY Times article re: Cruz’s support for pathway to legalization. And his actual amendments that he proposed would have gone into effect RIGHT AWAY–not “contingent on the border being secured.”

“I introduced two amendments to dramatically increase and improve and streamline legal immigration focused on high skilled workers. High Tech and high skilled foreign students study here and graduate here in engineering, science, math, and then we send them back to their own country to work. They start businesses there, when they could start business here, and create jobs. It makes no sense. The amendment I introduced would increase the numbers of temporary high skilled visas five fold.”

My point isn’t to denigrate Cruz by any means. He seems to be at least taking a hard line on not granting citizenship by any means, which is far stronger stance than most. But if you or anyone strongly believe that allowing for “probationary”/”temporary” work visas/permits issued immediately to constitute – at a minimum – “amnesty”, I hate to break it to ya: no one that I see as possibly running in 2016 is affirmatively against this. In fact, they are all for it.

I appreciate that you’re not trying to denigrate Cruz, but I’ll note that you highlight this quote of Cruz:

“The amendment I introduced would increase the numbers of temporary high skilled visas five fold.”

Whether that’s something good or bad would seem to be a separate issue than amnesty for illegals. We’re talking about high tech workers from India to work for Google etc. One could argue that much of that work is outsourced already to India, and that’s the real impact on wages, and possibly by increasing the skilled visas we would just have more of that work done over here, but I don’t know. The main thing is that’s a separate issue, has nothing to do with the Democrat’s and GOPe’s amnesty proposals.

Also, the rightscoop article you link to says: “Sen. Ted Cruz introduced an amendment to the current immigration bill back in May that would have removed the path to citizenship from the bill completely.” Additionally, they talked about Cruz’s amendments to the Rubio bill that he undoubtedly wouldn’t have voted for anyway but he was trying to make it better, amendments that failed to pass the Democratic senate. “Work permits” is different from “a pathway to citizenship.” Maybe I’m missing something. From the rightscoop article: “Now if you happen to believe that temp legal status is amnesty, as some of you have suggested, then I guess that means Ted Cruz supports amnesty. But that’s not what it is. It isn’t amnesty.” I have to grant you that Cruz may not be “perfect” on immigration. Certainly, whatever the proposal is would have to get through congress first. I say congress should put e-verify and border security first, and in a later year consider work permits or green cards or amnesty for illegals, perhaps with some flexibility and exceptions for a limited number of current illegals that meet certain conditions.

Speaking Truth To Power doesn’t need probably cause, it needs only the feeling that some rightwing nutjob is guilty of something, the search for the something to be determinedforgotten about after the execution.

Steve E. – since I know you are watching these events most closely. It would seem the MSM is not just misrepresenting the legal situation here but deliberately lying about it. At some point libel laws don’t protect you in non-opinion pieces, which most of these articles appear to be.

have to grant you that Cruz may not be “perfect” on immigration. Certainly, whatever the proposal is would have to get through congress first. I say congress should put e-verify and border security first, and in a later year consider work permits or green cards or amnesty for illegals, perhaps with some flexibility and exceptions for a limited number of current illegals that meet certain conditions.

anotherJoe on June 20, 2014 at 2:17 PM

Well, I just don’t think we are going to get anything that doesn’t grant the “temporary” work permits right away, especially with someone like Cruz on board with this. I would say the best we could hope for, IF GOP is insistent on passing “something” on immigration, is a bill passed with a (hopefully) GOP controlled Senate in early 2015 that includes Conryn’s amendment to teh Gang of 8 bill on the security provisions combined with Cruz’s amendment for the permits. No pathway to citizenship whatsoever.

Obviously, this would not, by any means, be, as you put, a “perfect” bill, but it’s one that I think enough of both sides – even Barry and Chuck U Schumer – would begrudgingly accept. And if the Dems don’t and block it, then at least the GOP can say they “tried to pass something”, but it was the Dems who blocked it. Either way, it takes it off the table as a toxic issue for the 2016 election.

Steve E. – since I know you are watching these events most closely. It would seem the MSM is not just misrepresenting the legal situation here but deliberately lying about it. At some point libel laws don’t protect you in non-opinion pieces, which most of these articles appear to be.

Ed wrote two separate posts last month after a clearly irritated federal judge issued an injunction shutting down prosecutors’ secret investigation of Walker and conservative groups for allegedly coordinating during his recall election campaign.

Was that the same judge who bizarrely applauded breaking (at least the spirit of) the law in his opinion? I’m guessing he’s not long for the bench, frankly.

Either way, it takes it off the table as a toxic issue for the 2016 election.

cdog0613 on June 20, 2014 at 3:32 PM

Good post, but I don’t agree that it’s a toxic or even net negative issue.

Especially now with the hordes flooding across the border, the people, independents and even many Dems, are going to want a candidate that will stand up boldly to the illegal menace. For those that say a meager or non-existent gain in the Hispanic vote will help us, not if it takes a big chunk out of the anti-amnesty vote that is propping up our white vote. Take immigration off the table, that is gone. We lose. Plus tons of Republicans would be totally miffed if the bill was seen as amnesty, and stay home. We doubly lose.

Especially now with the hordes flooding across the border, the people, independents and even many Dems, are going to want a candidate that will stand up boldly to the illegal menace. For those that say a meager or non-existent gain in the Hispanic vote will help us, not if it takes a big chunk out of the anti-amnesty vote that is propping up our white vote. Take immigration off the table, that is gone. We lose. Plus tons of Republicans would be totally miffed if the bill was seen as amnesty, and stay home. We doubly lose.

anotherJoe on June 20, 2014 at 4:01 PM

I couldn’t agree more with your thoughts on amnesty. It will make the GOP completely irrelevant, and will ultimately kill the GOP altogether, and will finish off America as we know it.

I’m willing to wait for a more direct stance on amnesty (in any form), before I throw him under the bus.

The reason I’m willing to wait for a direct answer from him, is the fact that every other aspect of him that I know of right now, is that he’s very conservative in all other areas.

Add to this, the FACT that the left is scared to DEATH of Gov. Walker and his outstanding and irrefutable Conservative results in WI. Which makes me like him even more. Right now my first choice is without question, Ted Cruz. But Gov. Walker is second on my list.

Imagine if someone was sued, won his case, and the media reports the next day focused only on the plaintiff’s accusations without mentioning the verdict.

I don’t have to use my imagination. That’s basically how the media dealt with George Zimmerman. Even when they finally covered the verdict, they tried to suggest it was shocking that he wasn’t convicted.